TropicBird From United States of America, joined May 2005, 502 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 19484 times:
Another damaged C-17 at Bagram....
Quote: C-17 damaged in gear-up landing at Bagram
Air Force Times
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Feb 2, 2009 15:49:40 EST
A C-17 Globemaster made a “gear up” landing at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan late Friday.
The crew got off the plane safely, but there was a small fire and extensive damage to plane’s underside, according to Air Force reports.
The plane, assigned to Charleston Air Force Base, S.C., was landing at Bagram around 10 p.m. when the accident occurred, reports said. The emergency resulted in the temporary closure of runway at the largest military airport in Afghanistan. Air operations resumed Saturday.
Accident and safety investigation boards are looking into what caused the accident.
Friday’s accident was the second bad C-17 landing in Afghanistan during the past two months.
There were no injuries Dec. 23 when a C-17 from Charleston rolled off the runway at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan while trying to land at 6:20 a.m.
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2986 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 19476 times:
Bennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 5994 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 19468 times:
IMO they need to order some more before it is too late.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11019 posts, RR: 53 Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 19418 times:
Pilot - "Co, are you on the brakes, it is taking a lot of power to taxi?"
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 15272 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 19331 times:
Why does this keep happening at Bagram and not in Iraq, is it the austere conditions of the infrastructure in Afghanistan vs Iraq?..
TropicBird From United States of America, joined May 2005, 502 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 18512 times:
Here is a link to a picture of the aircraft on the runway. Note that you can download a bigger picture at the web-site:
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2986 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 18487 times:
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 18346 times:
Negative, its forward of the gear on the right side.
Looks like the damage is pretty bad, probably save the plane, re-skin the bottom, and move on to March. Charleston just gave 97-0043 to March (yes, a 9th C-17), since they are getting the newest ones out of the factory.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
Dragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1142 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 18288 times:
Post gear up landing checklist:
Engines--shutdown
Gear handle--place in down position
Copilot--agree to say nothing about position of handle
Evacuate aircraft
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 18281 times:
Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 8): Looks like the damage is pretty bad, probably save the plane, re-skin the bottom, and move on to March. Charleston just gave 97-0043 to March (yes, a 9th C-17), since they are getting the newest ones out of the factory.
Yeah it's bad looking. I was out there this morning, and although I didn't get to go right up to it, it clearly had hull damage, and some warping.
This is like the third one I've seen in the last few months. And I won't say that ALL C-17 pilots do it, but it seems like a good amount of them enjoy "flying hard" into a "combat zone." In other words they really man handle that aircraft, acting like they're flying into some raging war zone. When the truth of the matter is that we're out there every day flying search and destroy.
Dragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1142 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 18270 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10): I'm sure you you were just joking around... but shit like that will get your wings taken away so fast, you won't know what hit you.
Balling up an aircraft is bad, but lying to cover your ass will be the nail in your coffin.
-UH60
Joking of course. Plus, C-17s probably have FDR/CVRs? Not sure on that though.
DODCFR From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 70 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 18163 times:
I wonder how they put the fire out. I don't see a single CFR vehicle in the picture. Does anybody know what kind of ARFF equipment they have there?
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 18137 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10): Yeah it's bad looking. I was out there this morning, and although I didn't get to go right up to it, it clearly had hull damage, and some warping
Warping isn't good, but as I said, if its not too bad, they should be able to repair it. After all, they fixed 01-0196, and that had all kinds of damage..just not on the entire underside of the aircraft, lol.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
Venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18085 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10): Balling up an aircraft is bad, but lying to cover your ass will be the nail in your coffin.
-UH60
I've seen aircrews huddle after a incident to make sure they had their story straight but if the acft has a CVR it would be fatal to their careers to lie. I would give good odds on this that a checklist was "not" followed, seems alot of that is going around the USAF lately. Would be interesting to here crew coordination on this since most C-17 crews are augmented with 4 pilots in the flightdeck that nobody did not notice that the gear was not down. Also give odds the bitching Betty warning voice was silenced or turned off. Almost sounds like the same buffonary that went on with the last C-5 crash at Dover shutting down the wrong engine.
All accidents are 99.9% preventable.
Human factors of lack of experiance,training,and failure to follow proper procedure are usally the cause. Flight safety 101.
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2515 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18083 times:
Quoting DODCFR (Reply 12): I wonder how they put the fire out. I don't see a single CFR vehicle in the picture. Does anybody know what kind of ARFF equipment they have there?
Looking at the number of vehicles and open crates there, I'd expect that photograph was taken a good number of hours after the landing. The ARFF vehicles are probably back in their barn.
Dragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1142 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17942 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 15): Looking at the number of vehicles and open crates there, I'd expect that photograph was taken a good number of hours after the landing. The ARFF vehicles are probably back in their barn.
I agree. The cart with all the hoses coming out of it in front of the left wing, I imagine that is some sort of regulator to provide air to bags or hyd fluid to a jacks to lift the aircraft evenly.
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 17742 times:
Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 14): . Almost sounds like the same buffonary that went on with the last C-5 crash at Dover shutting down the wrong engine
They didn't shut down the wrong engine, they used the wrong throttle after shutting down the right engine. They left the throttle of the operational engine at idle, and used the shut down engines throttle. Stupidity.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
Tiger119 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 17704 times:
Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 14): crew coordination on this since most C-17 crews are augmented with 4 pilots in the flightdeck
- A total of four pilots or four additional pilots on the flight deck? The one C-17 that I have been on IIRC had two bunks and one jump seat.
Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
Venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 17396 times:
Quoting Tiger119 (Reply 18): - A total of four pilots or four additional pilots on the flight deck? The one C-17 that I have been on IIRC had two bunks and one jump seat.
There are four crew seats in the flight deck plus 2 bunks with a other 2 seats in the crew rest area.
Venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 17391 times:
Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 17): They didn't shut down the wrong engine, they used the wrong throttle after shutting down the right engine. They left the throttle of the operational engine at idle, and used the shut down engines throttle. Stupidity.
BubbaJin From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 27 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (3 years 2 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 14868 times:
Correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like in these photos the gear lever is in the up position. . yikes. .
Tiger119 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 13910 times:
Changing the subject slightly, but, I just watched a video clip (again) of a C-17 crew from SUU and it was said that their flight into Bagram would be a nighttime, war zone landing meaning no lights. So I can understand not having the bright, "head lights" on during final approach but what about the navigation lights (green light on starboard wing tip, red light on the port wing tip, red strobes on top of the fuselage and one on the bottom of the fuselage, etc)?
David
Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13822 times:
Quoting Tiger119 (Reply 23): So I can understand not having the bright, "head lights" on during final approach but what about the navigation lights (green light on starboard wing tip, red light on the port wing tip, red strobes on top of the fuselage and one on the bottom of the fuselage, etc)?
I'm not 100% sure with the 17s, but on the 5s, ALL lights are off during combat landings into "war zones".
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
25 ZANL188: So are the C-17 guys getting careless or what? 5/8/2009 - SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, Ill. (AFNS) -- Air Mobility Command here May 7 released the results of
26 Oroka: Ouch! I guess a few people are now tracking towards flying a desk!
27 HercPPMX: All Lights would be turned off, the only lights that would be on, would be any IR (infra-red) lights if the aircraft had them equipped. IR lights are
28 Dragon6172: In a more perfect world... you would not be able to "inadvertantly" disable the GPWS.
29 BubbaJin: A C-17 is a pretty big target and considering the current security situation, I don't blame them for performing combat landings. Additionally, I am p
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2005, 502 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 5994 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2515 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Sep 2006, 470 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
